FACT CHECK: More US drilling didn't drop gas price

robert l. bentham

robert l. bentham

Active Member
Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2011
Messages
3,692
Reaction score
863
By JACK GILLUM, Associated Press – 15 hours ago ​
WASHINGTON (AP) — It's the political cure-all for high gas prices: Drill here, drill now. But more U.S. drilling has not changed how deeply the gas pump drills into your wallet, math and history show.​
​
​
math and history are just "theories and opinions" inconsistent with what i "believe", and i therefore reject them...:smack: ​
 
The US consumes 20% of the world's supply of oil. We're sitting on about 2-4% of the world's supply of oil. Guys do the math here. It's impossible to feed ourselves oil indefinitely. As long as we use oil we'll need an external resource to gain that oil.

One plus of Global Warming is oil tankers from the Soviets can now cross the North Pole and get to us. This is a faster trip than oil from the middle-east. From an economic standpoint this might help a bit as we now have another option to bid, with a slightly less cost in transportation of the product.
 
Here's some more Liberal logic:
Growing your own garden in your back yard doesn't lower prices at the grocery store, therefore you should;

1. Go on a diet, you're too fat anyway.

2. Import all food stuffs from China; they grow it cheaper.

3. Freeze all food prices, except for the 1%ers.

4. Occupy your local grocery store.

5. Find an alternative to food. It's the future, and scientist have almost found a way.

6. Follow Obama's advice, he knows best.
 
Actually Fade most of the ultra liberals I know grow their own food and try to grow unique versions of veggies that aren't purchaseable in the stores. Not all but quite a bit. Oh and most of the ultraliberals also know Obama's a centrist.
 
Fact Check

Most ultra liberals believe what you just wrote.
 
redrumloa said:
Obama is a Marxist, but you knew that already.
Click to expand...
If you look at the Healthcare Bill he uses the power of government to force paying Corporations. Perhaps you mean Fasicst?
 
Fade said:
Here's some more Liberal logic:
Click to expand...
If by "liberal" you mean free... as in free from formal constraints.

By the way - trying to insult people by telling them what they think only fools you because liberals know what they think much better than you do - which is quite apparent because you are shameless about talking about things you know nothing about.
 
when my son asks me what he should do with "extra" money... i tell him guns and ammo... socially im more liberal than most as ill tolerate much foolishness, but i think country our has been stolen, beat and straight robbed by a few really really realy rich men who seem to own a lot of shit i count on to live... i dont like that... i dont believe in conspiracy theories... i reject anything that is not fact.... but i also reject that 50 related coincidences is a theory.... ron paul is the edge of the two sided coin just in case the populace ever gets "uppity" and tries to usurp their power by "popular vote" he is the fodder for the disenfranchised and he comes to you in broad daylight to take all of obamas power for himself and then some, just like the man before him, and the man before him, and the man before him, and the man before him....
 
robert l. bentham said:
ron paul is the edge of the two sided coin just in case the populace ever gets "uppity" and tries to usurp their power by "popular vote" he is the fodder for the disenfranchised and he comes to you in broad daylight to take all of obamas power for himself and then some, just like the man before him, and the man before him, and the man before him, and the man before him....
Click to expand...

I don't see it that way. There is a huge effort in the party to keep him from being the nominee. Too much money to lose. Ron Paul is a libertarian more than a true populist - but he is as much a danger to the vested interests as a populist.
 
Come, come McDeath. Everyone knows who's the champ around here when it comes to mind reading, and positing ulterior motives. We are insulted with it all the time.
 
Fade said:
Come, come McDeath. Everyone knows who's the champ around here when it comes to mind reading, and positing ulterior motives. We are insulted with it all the time.
Click to expand...

i want it to be about me damn it...
 
FluffyMcDeath said:
I don't see it that way. There is a huge effort in the party to keep him from being the nominee. Too much money to lose. Ron Paul is a libertarian more than a true populist - but he is as much a danger to the vested interests as a populist.
Click to expand...

and thats one way to look at it... but lets face the facts, we all know that a third party divides votes and both romney and santorum are trying to get paul out or keep him in depending upon agendas...imho
 
robert l. bentham said:
and thats one way to look at it... but lets face the facts, we all know that a third party divides votes and both romney and santorum are trying to get paul out or keep him in depending upon agendas...imho
Click to expand...

A third party might help.
Then a fourth.
Then a fifth.
Then.... etc.
 
robert l. bentham said:
and thats one way to look at it... but lets face the facts, we all know that a third party divides votes and both romney and santorum are trying to get paul out or keep him in depending upon agendas...imho
Click to expand...
If he was the nominee there would be no danger of Ron Paul as a third party candidate. He just can't be allowed to be the nominee, and if you check out how the GOP ignore and/or violate their own rules to lock out his delegates or otherwise diminish the influence of the crowds of people he can turn out you can see the seriousness with which they view the threat. The issues that he raises are not those that are allowed to be raised by a president - because when a "lone nut" is saying them you can tell people he's a nut and not to listen. These days I come across more and more people who used to not listen to him because he was a nut and now have listened to him and found that he isn't a nut. They may or may not agree with him - but it shows that he has routinely been misrepresented in the media - the media are the "authorities" that people look to first to get their opinions from on matters that they don't want to spend time investigating.
 
Robert said:
A third party might help.
Then a fourth.
Then a fifth.
Then.... etc.


And
faethor likes this.
------------------------------------

Come on Faethor., you know better than to "like" a goofy statement like Robert just made.
I don't expect him to know anything about US politics, cause he's from over the pond, but you should know better.

For your edification Robert, here is a list of the people and their parties from the 2008 Presidential election.

Presidential candidate/running mate Party

Alan Keyes/Brian Rohrbough Independent
Barack Obama/Joe Biden Democratic
Bob Barr/Wayne Allyn Root Libertarian
Brian Moore/Stewart Alexander Socialist
Charles Jay/Thomas L. Knapp Boston Tea
Chuck Baldwin/Darrell Castle Constitution
Cynthia McKinney/Rosa Clemente Green
Gene Amondson/Leroy Pletten Prohibition
Gloria La Riva/Eugene Puryear Socialism & Liberation
John McCain/Sarah Palin Republican
Ralph Nader/Matt Gonzalez Independence-Ecology
Róger Calero/Alyson Kennedy Socialist Workers
Thomas Stevens/Alden Link Objectivist

Right off hand, I don't remember 3 of them being on my ballot, the Boston Tea, Socialism & Liberation & Objectivist, but this was the official list.
 
Fade said:
And
faethor likes this.
------------------------------------

Come on Faethor., you know better than to "like" a goofy statement like Robert just made.
I don't expect him to know anything about US politics, cause he's from over the pond, but you should know better.

For your edification Robert, here is a list of the people and their parties from the 2008 Presidential election.

Right off hand, I don't remember 3 of them being on my ballot, the Boston Tea, Socialism & Liberation & Objectivist, but this was the official list.
Click to expand...
Take out the Dem and Repugnet and let me know how many Electorial Votes those others netted combined. In related news Russia had 5 candidates on their ballot. Must be a stellar democracy right Fade?

Face it Fade our options are binary. There is no viable 3rd party option. There are many issues and many sides to issues. The choice of two parties undersells the democratic aspects of our Republic. The Founders didn't want parties to exist. Unfortunately parties quickly sprung up.
 
Oh how the memory fades!
All the complaints by the Dems about Kerry loosing because Nader took enough E votes to cause him to lose in 2000. If only, if only.....

I also remember Ross Perot.

Your memory is very short.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top